|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
grahamhgreen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:05 PM Original message |
When Russia pulled out of Afghanistan, did the Taliban and Al-Qaeda attack Russia? No. So the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muntrv (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:07 PM Response to Original message |
1. Just like did the Vietcong follow us to the USA after 1975? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fire_Medic_Dave (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:10 PM Response to Original message |
2. So you think Bin Laden's poverty led to his actions as a terrorist? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
napi21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:11 PM Response to Original message |
3. The Russia argument is a straw man. IF the reason we were attacked is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BOG PERSON (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:19 PM Response to Original message |
4. Uh, no, because the Soviet Union dissolved like two years later. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:23 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. in no small part due to being bankrupted by occupying Afghanistan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Alamuti Lotus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 09:43 PM Response to Original message |
6. "Taliban" did not exist at the time of the Soviet occupation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Scarsdale Vibe (228 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 10:02 PM Response to Original message |
7. Yes, the Taliban led and sponsored attacks in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in the 90s. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sam sarrha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 10:17 PM Response to Original message |
8. they arent gonna quit mak'n babys cause "WE" ask them, no womens rights to not have babys, +polygamy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nadinbrzezinski (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-11-09 10:20 PM Response to Original message |
9. Actually you could make the argument that yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 06:57 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC